Are Libertarians Racist? Salon thinks so.....

[Kirk Freeman]

Shoot, Kirk's been calling us racists for years. Why don't you guys call him out?​

Hey, look, I am dragged into another thread by INGO's resident crybaby.

Sorry about the marks I left. Put some ice on it.

 

[indiucky]

Shoot, Kirk's been calling us racists for years. Why don't you guys call him out?

Kirk,

Quit calling the Lincoln hating Johnny Rebs in the Libertarian Party racists...It is not very nice and is very bad...M'kay?

Rick

There you go.....

 

[steveh_131]

Kirk,

Quit calling the Lincoln hating Johnny Rebs in the Libertarian Party racists...It is not very nice and is very bad...M'kay?

Rick

There you go.....

See, that's more like it.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

In his now infamous interview with Rachel Maddow, he admitted that he had a major problem with the Civil Rights Act of 1964, particularly the provisions that “harbor in on private businesses and their policies.” In other words, he didn’t like the government telling businesses that they had to serve black people. According to libertarians, this is a clear violation of one’s freedom to discriminate; that if a business owner does not want to serve a black person, that is their right.

One of the problems I have with Rand is his attempts to be on multiple sides of issues. Recently, he's made comments that would be at odds with Salon's assertion. Seems like I've heard him say the .gov was right about this.

On another note, this demonstrates how much work will have to be done to ever rid ourselves of the progressive mindset that rots our country. There is a difference between it's a good idea for private businesses to not discriminate and bringing the full weight of the feds in to stop you from doing so. The RFRA debate was filled with this as well.

 

[indiucky]

See, that's more like it.

Kirk's a tough, confident gentleman...He can handle it...

 

[bradmedic04]

I have no idea what's going on, but here's a picture of crazy Uncle Ron

 

[jamil]

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Kirk,

Quit calling the Lincoln hating Johnny Rebs in the Libertarian Party racists...It is not very nice and is very bad...M'kay?

Rick

There you go.....

Don't forget us small l, independents who despise Lincoln....

See, that's more like it.

Yep, I agree.

One of the problems I have with Rand is his attempts to be on multiple sides of issues. Recently, he's made comments that would be at odds with Salon's assertion. Seems like I've heard him say the .gov was right about this.

On another note, this demonstrates how much work will have to be done to ever rid ourselves of the progressive mindset that rots our country. There is a difference between it's a good idea for private businesses to not discriminate and bringing the full weight of the feds in to stop you from doing so. The RFRA debate was filled with this as well.

Do you happen to have a link?

And I, if I owned a business would discriminate. But not against any of the "protected classes", even if they weren't "protected". I'd discriminate just as I currently do, if you're an *******, I don't want to be around you nor would I want you in my (hypothetical business). Should *******s be a protected class?

Kirk's a tough, cocky gentleman...He can handle it...

FTFY but if I need an attorney, that is what I want.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Do you happen to have a link?

No. Heard him say it, at least twice, on a radio and/or tv program.

 

[KG1]

Shoot, Kirk's been calling us racists for years. Why don't you guys call him out?

I would like to give a shout out to Kirk. Happy now?

 

[Timjoebillybob]

No. Heard him say it, at least twice, on a radio and/or tv program.

I've heard him say that it was perhaps needed at the time (but not that the gov was right to do so), but no more. Which isn't a change in what he has said previously or after.

 

[HoughMade]

Kirk,

Quit calling the Lincoln hating Johnny Rebs in the Libertarian Party racists...It is not very nice and is very bad...M'kay?

Rick

There you go.....

Let's be clear. Someone who advocates that the state may be better off out of the Union? I disagree, but see the point.
Someone who claims that there is a legal right to secede? I disagree, but hey, let's debate.
Someone who claims that secession in 1860 was not based, in overwhelmingly large measure, on maintaining a system that subjugated a people based upon race so that their stolen lives and labor could be used to prop up an inherently corrupt economy? They may not be racists, but they're cozying up to people who are....and they've let their faith in secession overwhelm any notion of logic that they may have once had.

 

[Woobie]

Let's be clear. Someone who advocates that the state may be better off out of the Union? I disagree, but see the point.
Someone who claims that there is a legal right to secede? I disagree, but hey, let's debate.
Someone who claims that secession in 1860 was not based, in overwhelmingly large measure, on maintaining a system that subjugated a people based upon race so that their stolen lives and labor could be used to prop up an inherently corrupt economy? They may not be racists, but they're cozying up to people who are....and they've let their faith in secession overwhelm any notion of logic that they may have once had.

I can't believe it, it finally let me rep you again!

The argument always is "it was about states rights." OK, I'll agree with that. But what state's right was in question? Drum roll please.…………...............Slavery. Hence, the Wah Buhtween the Stayeets was about slavery.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I've heard him say that it was perhaps needed at the time (but not that the gov was right to do so), but no more. Which isn't a change in what he has said previously or after.

I heard him say it was the right thing for the government to do and he supported it and I'm pretty sure he's said it since he's thrown his hat into the ring.

 

[jamil]

Oh please don't get them going.

 

[HoughMade]

Oh please don't get them going.

C'mon. I haven't brought abortion up in a long time. Let me have this one.

 

[indiucky]

Let's be clear. Someone who advocates that the state may be better off out of the Union? I disagree, but see the point.
Someone who claims that there is a legal right to secede? I disagree, but hey, let's debate.
Someone who claims that secession in 1860 was not based, in overwhelmingly large measure, on maintaining a system that subjugated a people based upon race so that their stolen lives and labor could be used to prop up an inherently corrupt economy? They may not be racists, but they're cozying up to people who are....and they've let their faith in secession overwhelm any notion of logic that they may have once had.

I need to learn to use purple....

As Kirk has said before..."It's about property ry-hyrats". (I forget how he spells "rights" but is is perfect) and as you said, where things get a little sticky is when we realize the property they were referring to were other human beings....(Kirk is not afraid to point that out which obviously gets under the skin of the Johnny Reb/Lincoln haters on the forum...)

As you state, certain things are debatable, but the underlying "serpent under the feet of the Founders" was slavery....I do believe however, that a large number of Southerners did not fight to keep slavery alive but to defend what they saw as aggression from an invading army...The fact that the landed gentry (slave owners) did everything they could to fire up the locals into believing that does not negate the fact that there was an army of blue marching through their land...

When I was a kid I would hear some of my older family members from down in Kentucky say "It's hotter than Billy Blue Blazes today"........I didn't realize at the time what the phrase meant...They were referring to the heat put off of the farms burned in Kentucky by the Union army...Now keep in mind the members of my family saying this were all die hard Scots-Irish, Pro Union, Republican since Lincoln, AND from Western Kentucky...The cradle of what passed for the Confederacy in Kentucky......

They just felt those rich slave owning English Blue Bloods were getting what they deserved......

 

[jamil]

I heard him say it was the right thing for the government to do and he supported it.

I think I heard that too. But I thought he also put it in context of "at the time". But I think the whole thing was him walking back statements he originally made disparaging the CRA of 1964. Rather than him walking it back, I wish he'd just stand up to what he believed.

I think the CRA oversteps the government's constitutional authority. It shouldn't have the authority to create extraspecial classes of people. It shouldn't have the authority to tell people who they should serve. And it is not racist at all to believe that if the reason you believe it has nothing to do with race.

If that's what Rand Paul believes then he should say that.

 

[jamil]

Oh please don't get them going.

C'mon. I haven't brought abortion up in a long time. Let me have this one.

Well, they aren't taking the bait. Yet. Maybe they're huddling up for an all out [strike]assault[/strike] non-aggressive argument.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

I heard him say it was the right thing for the government to do and he supported it and I'm pretty sure he's said it since he's thrown his hat into the ring.

It's quite possible I've misremembered, I'm told frequently I have the memory of a goldfish (but I love my wife). But do you have a link?

Oh please don't get them going.

Oh Yes, please do.

C'mon. I haven't brought abortion up in a long time. Let me have this one.

I'm a small l libertarian, you can have both... heck you can have 3 or 4 if you so desire and they do too.....